Objective: This project was undertaken to determine the sources of evidence used by Clinical Nurse Specialists, to examine how they use this evidence in their practice, and to ascertain facilitators and barriers in accessing, utilizing, and disseminating evidence. Design: This pilot study was carried out using qualitative methods, specifically a descriptive, exploratory design. Population, Sample, Setting: The population of interest for this study are Clinical Nurse Specialists (CNS). A sample of 9 CNSs was recruited from one of the largest Health Regions in Alberta, Canada. Purposive and snowballing sampling were utilized to obtain the sample. Methods: This study was approved by the University Ethics Review Committee within the Health Region. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews. The interviews were audio taped, transcribed, and loaded onto NUD*IST 6. Data were coded using the structured questions, and a preliminary inspection of the open–ended responses. The analysis phase of the study involved searching for recurring themes that reflected both commonalities as well as variations among the participants. Verbatim extracts from the interviews are used as exemplars to illustrate the main analytical themes revealed in the research. Some of the data, by its very nature (e.g., sources of evidence, facilitators and barriers), were tabulated. Findings: Some data from this study (i.e. facilitators and barriers) confirm findings of previous studies. CNS reported the use of a variety of sources to obtain evidence, but tended to prefer interpersonal and interactive sources such as colleagues. CNS shared a variety of examples where they used evidence in their practice and the challenges they encountered in the process. Conclusions: The CNS are in key positions to facilitate evidence-based practice, acting as champions, facilitators, conduits or intermediaries for knowledge transfer and utilization. However, much work remains to be done in organizations to effectively support the enactment of this role.

Full metadata record

The Nature and Sources of Evidence Used by Clinical Nurse Specialists in Their Practice -- A Pilot Study

en_GB

dc.identifier.uri

http://hdl.handle.net/10755/152513

-

dc.description.abstract

<table><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-title">The Nature and Sources of Evidence Used by Clinical Nurse Specialists in Their Practice -- A Pilot Study</td></tr><tr class="item-sponsor"><td class="label">Conference Sponsor:</td><td class="value">Sigma Theta Tau International</td></tr><tr class="item-year"><td class="label">Conference Year:</td><td class="value">2004</td></tr><tr class="item-conference-date"><td class="label">Conference Date:</td><td class="value">July 21, 2004</td></tr><tr class="item-author"><td class="label">Author:</td><td class="value">Profetto-McGrath, Joanne, RN, MEd, PhD</td></tr><tr class="item-institute"><td class="label">P.I. Institution Name:</td><td class="value">University of Alberta</td></tr><tr class="item-author-title"><td class="label">Title:</td><td class="value">CHSRF/CIHR Post-Doctoral Fellow &amp; AHFMR Career Renewal Awardee, Assistant Professor</td></tr><tr class="item-email"><td class="label">Email:</td><td class="value">joanne.profetto-mcgrath@ualberta.ca</td></tr><tr class="item-co-authors"><td class="label">Co-Authors:</td><td class="value">Karen Bulmer Smith, RN, BScN</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="item-abstract">Objective: This project was undertaken to determine the sources of evidence used by Clinical Nurse Specialists, to examine how they use this evidence in their practice, and to ascertain facilitators and barriers in accessing, utilizing, and disseminating evidence. Design: This pilot study was carried out using qualitative methods, specifically a descriptive, exploratory design. Population, Sample, Setting: The population of interest for this study are Clinical Nurse Specialists (CNS). A sample of 9 CNSs was recruited from one of the largest Health Regions in Alberta, Canada. Purposive and snowballing sampling were utilized to obtain the sample. Methods: This study was approved by the University Ethics Review Committee within the Health Region. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews. The interviews were audio taped, transcribed, and loaded onto NUD*IST 6. Data were coded using the structured questions, and a preliminary inspection of the open&ndash;ended responses. The analysis phase of the study involved searching for recurring themes that reflected both commonalities as well as variations among the participants. Verbatim extracts from the interviews are used as exemplars to illustrate the main analytical themes revealed in the research. Some of the data, by its very nature (e.g., sources of evidence, facilitators and barriers), were tabulated. Findings: Some data from this study (i.e. facilitators and barriers) confirm findings of previous studies. CNS reported the use of a variety of sources to obtain evidence, but tended to prefer interpersonal and interactive sources such as colleagues. CNS shared a variety of examples where they used evidence in their practice and the challenges they encountered in the process. Conclusions: The CNS are in key positions to facilitate evidence-based practice, acting as champions, facilitators, conduits or intermediaries for knowledge transfer and utilization. However, much work remains to be done in organizations to effectively support the enactment of this role.</td></tr></table>

en_GB

dc.date.available

2011-10-26T11:39:06Z

-

dc.date.issued

2004-07-21

en_GB

dc.date.accessioned

2011-10-26T11:39:06Z

-

dc.description.sponsorship

Sigma Theta Tau International

en_GB

All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.